Thread: Capitalism isn't working ?

Originally Posted by earcutter

I think a bunch of economists are looking deeper into Hayek lately... but aren't giving up on Keynes until the 'hangover' is over. Can't really.

Funny vid. Yeah, the two big theories that have influenced our system. Though I think Hayek and Keynes will always be battling it out for primacy. It is like the Moon chasing the Sun.

Originally Posted by Mephisto

It seems to me the article is not really saying anything new. Maybe for an economist it is large step to say capitalism is not working. His actual reasons seem to be a bit more complicated than, say, Marx, but still based on the same principles of exploitation of the worker and control of capital into the hands of an elite. So this is a 'conflict theory' approach to studying capitalism vs. a 'functionalist' approach. Conflict theory is about seeing if any inequalities exist in a system and pointing out those inequalities. Generally they are trying to make a change within the system. Functionalist, can actually see inequality as a good thing. Why? Because the system needs inequality to exist. Doctors get paid more due to specialized knowledge than less skilled workers. When I was a student I saw merit in both approaches. Generally economist would have a different approach, a quasi functionalist method. They would like to understand how they can make capitalism work, not capitalism does not work. Their 'scientific knowledge' ruled Washington over and above other social sciences. I think since the economic down fall maybe there has been a paradigm shift amongst economist into looking at other theories. An interesting, though relatively old book, would be the Power Elite by Mills. Marx Weber, probably more familiar to our bros out in in Europe, wrote a lot on modernism and capitalism.

"...less skilled workers" who build and maintain the hospitals and clinics in which those doctors practice medicine, the machines which aid those doctors in arriving at their diagnoses, who change patients' soiled linens and bedpans, etc., etc.

It has been my experience that few people stay-the-course -- in any discipline -- when motivated by financial reward: "too long the road, too steep the climb"; and, ultimately, too few hours in which to enjoy those monetary riches. The more likely scenario is people in physically dangerous jobs get paid more than those who are not; and those who are tend to leave those jobs sooner, be injured, or die.

Speaking of doctors, how is Capitalism going to reconcile the shortfall of trained physicians, given the 8-million additional patients from the Affordable Healthcare Act? (25-million projected)

Originally Posted by JBHoren

"...less skilled workers" who build and maintain the hospitals and clinics in which those doctors practice medicine, the machines which aid those doctors in arriving at their diagnoses, who change patients' soiled linens and bedpans, etc., etc.

It has been my experience that few people stay-the-course -- in any discipline -- when motivated by financial reward: "too long the road, too steep the climb"; and, ultimately, too few hours in which to enjoy those monetary riches. The more likely scenario is people in physically dangerous jobs get paid more than those who are not; and those who are tend to leave those jobs sooner, be injured, or die.

Speaking of doctors, how is Capitalism going to reconcile the shortfall of trained physicians, given the 8-million additional patients from the Affordable Healthcare Act? (25-million projected)

I dunno... I have always found the phrase "Too many Chiefs, not enough Indians" to explain exactly why those with specialized skills earn more than those without. In fact, I'd almost even go so far as to say that the "lower skilled" folks are probably very talented, so much so that they could make an equal amount if they marketed themselves viably or changed to a field that showcased their talents... that's how most entrepreneurs get their start (we have several fine examples on this forum), with many earning quite a lot.

Go back to my orange farmer example earlier... the farmer could have started as nothing more than a set of hands on a construction crew with a penchant for growing beautiful oranges in his backyard at home. After learning a little bit about the orange business, and being a clever boy, he devises a way to grow oranges faster, larger and with more consistent results than current orange farmers. All he needs is some startup capital. So, one day, he harvests all of the oranges from his lone orange tree in his backyard and heads to his local farmer's market. He sells them and then invests that money in means to start growing more. When that (larger) yield is sold, he invests again and the cycle repeats. The man just went from "less skilled construction worker" to "highly skilled orange farmer" relying only on himself and his will to succeed.

As to the shortfall of trained physicians, capitalism has an answer for that one, too... everything is supply and demand. When the demand is high, you either have huge profits for the same vendors who have been at things a while, or you have more competition in the marketplace. Either way, think of all the recent grads who are currently employed by your favorite coffee house as a barista, and you may see the competition begin to grow in the medical field.

Originally Posted by JBHoren

"...less skilled workers" who build and maintain the hospitals and clinics in which those doctors practice medicine, the machines which aid those doctors in arriving at their diagnoses, who change patients' soiled linens and bedpans, etc., etc.

It has been my experience that few people stay-the-course -- in any discipline -- when motivated by financial reward: "too long the road, too steep the climb"; and, ultimately, too few hours in which to enjoy those monetary riches. The more likely scenario is people in physically dangerous jobs get paid more than those who are not; and those who are tend to leave those jobs sooner, be injured, or die.

Speaking of doctors, how is Capitalism going to reconcile the shortfall of trained physicians, given the 8-million additional patients from the Affordable Healthcare Act? (25-million projected)

In some ways I think I should reconcile that by saying specialized and long term training. Many people can be trained very quickly to do some jobs where as some professions require a lot of training. A functionalist would argue that doctors need monetary and prestige incentive to even go into the field. Who would want to spend that long in school and as an intern? Of course, using a doctor as an example might not be the best. According to functionalist theory any modern society needs a 'division of labor', not everyone can be at the top of the social economic ladder. We believe so in our ideals that what one can achieve is unlimited but the reality is very little achieve unlimited riches. You might have the desire and know how but you might not make it. Others do not even really need it. Happy to have what they have and nothing more. Durkheim spoke of organic solidarity, when highly complex societies have a great deal of cohesion despite inequalities. We become very interdependent on each other, since we need so much and require others to do so for us. I cannot build my house, nor...well I try to cut my hair. Ok, so framers really do not make that much money but they know what they are doing is important. They can also use the training built up over years to move into higher paying positions. If the opportunity and the desire is there they can also start a company. Or they just might feel happy to work with their hands during the day. If they do not like it they are going to get out of the profession quick as you said. If the dynamic density, or availability of suitable labor, the person will not suffer from what Durkheim would refer to as anomie. So this is where conflict theory could come in and establish that capitalism is a poor system. It does not create the type of social cohesion necessary for stability, creating huge gaps of inequality and concentrating wealth in the hands of too few.

As to the increase in patients they have it all worked out. More and more PAs and Nurse practitioners and less need to see the M.D.

Accidentally came upon a quote that might be applicable today not only in the US but globally Quotes by Louis Brandeis | Inequality.org .

Bob

Originally Posted by BobH

Accidentally came upon a quote that might be applicable today not only in the US but globally Quotes by Louis Brandeis | Inequality.org .

Bob

An interesting quote...Its probably derived from his progressive era research about corporations, banks and their interlocking directorates that made the consolidation of economic and political power among a small group of companies and investment bankers, such as J. P. Morgan possible in the early 20th century.

http://www.amazon.com/Other-Peoples-...bankers+use+it

Originally Posted by jhenry

An interesting quote...Its probably derived from his progressive era research about corporations, banks and their interlocking directorates that made the consolidation of economic and political power among a small group of companies and investment bankers, such as J. P. Morgan possible in the early 20th century.

Other People's Money And How The Bankers Use It: Louis D. Brandeis: 9781438285269: Amazon.com: Books

They weren't referred to as "Robber Barons" for nothing.

Bob